AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546 PR-645 2012 Orchardgrass Report G.L. Olson, S.R. Smith, T.D. Phillips, G.D. Lacefield, and D.C. Ditsch, Plant and Soil Sciences Introduction Orchardgrass (Dactylus glomerata) is a high-quality, productive, cool-season grass that is well-adapted to Kentucky conditions. This grass is used for pasture, hay, green chop, and silage, but it requires better management than tall fescue for greater yields, higher quality, and longer stand life. It produces an open, bunchtype sod, making it compatible with alfalfa or red clover as a pasture and hay crop or as habitat for wildlife. This report provides current yield data on orchardgrass varieties included in yield trials in Kentucky as well as guidelines for selecting orchardgrass varieties. Table 10 shows a summary of all orchardgrass varieties tested in Kentucky for the last 10-plus years. The UK Forage Extension Web site at www.uky.edu/ag/ Forage contains electronic versions of all forage variety testing reports from Kentucky and surrounding states and from a large number of other forage publications. Important Selection Considerations Maturity. Orchardgrass varieties will range in maturity from early to late, based on the date of heading. In this report, early-maturing varieties will in general have higher first-cutting yields than later-maturing varieties because they are more mature at the date of first cutting. Orchardgrass typically matures earlier in the spring than red clover or alfalfa. Later-maturing varieties are preferred for use with red clover or alfalfa because they are at a more optimal stage of maturity when the legume is ready for cutting. Local adaptation and seasonal yield. Choose a variety adapted to Kentucky, as indicated by good performance across years and locations in replicated yield trials such as those presented in this publication. Also, look for varieties that are productive in the desired season of use. Table 1. Temperature and rainfall at Lexington, Kentucky, in 2010, 2011, and 2012. 2010 2011 2012 2 Temp Rainfall Temp Rainfall Temp Rainfall F DEP 1 IN DEP F DEP IN DEP F DEP IN DEP JAN 29-2 2.40-0.46 29-2 2.10-0.76 38 +7 4.80 +1.94 FEB 29-6 1.38-1.83 39 +4 6.34 +3.13 40 +5 5.39 +2.18 MAR 47 +3 1.05-3.35 47 +3 4.76 +0.36 56 +12 5.64 +1.24 APR 59 +4 2.74-1.14 58 +3 12.36 +8.48 56 +1 3.26-0.62 MAY 67 +3 7.84 +3.37 64 0 6.72 +2.25 69 +5 4.02-0.45 JUN 76 +4 4.61 +0.95 74 +2 2.61-1.05 73 +1 2.42-1.24 JUL 78 +2 5.49 +0.49 80 +4 6.29 1.29 81 +5 2.50-2.50 AUG 78 +3 1.54-2.39 75 0 2.89-1.04 75 0 1.68-2.25 SEP 71 +3 1.14-2.06 66-2 5.52 +2.32 67-1 6.40 +3.20 OCT 59 +2 1.22-1.35 55-2 4.10 +1.53 55-2 2.00-0.57 NOV 47 +2 4.58 +1.19 50 +5 9.53 +6.14 DEC 28-8 2.15-1.93 41 +5 5.58 +1.60 Total 36.14-8.41 68.80 +24.25 38.11 +0.93 1 DEP is departure from the long-term average. 2 2012 data is for the ten months through October. Table 2. Temperature and rainfall at Princeton, Kentucky, in 2010, 2011, and 2012. 2010 2011 2012 2 Temp Rainfall Temp Rainfall Temp Rainfall F DEP 1 IN DEP F DEP IN DEP F DEP IN DEP JAN 31-3 3.06-0.74 32-2 2.35-1.45 40 +6 3.01-0.79 FEB 33-5 1.54-2.89 40 +2 5.71 +1.28 54 +6 1.73-2.70 MAR 48 +1 3.24-1.70 50 +3 5.54 +0.60 60 +13 3.27-1.67 APR 62 3 3.3-1.54 61 +2 16.15 +11.35 60 +1 0.62-4.18 MAY 69 +2 10.41 +5.45 66-1 7.22 +2.26 71 +4 1.36-3.60 JUN 79 4 4.82 0.97 77 +2 4.60 +0.75 74-5 2.38-1.47 JUL 80 2 2.73-1.56 81 +3 2.98-1.31 83 +5 1.40-2.89 AUG 81 4 2.46-1.55 77 0 3.95-0.06 77 0 4.27 +0.26 SEP 72 1 0.94-2.39 68-3 3.86 +0.53 69-2 5.45 +1.82 OCT 60 +1 0.97-2.08 57-2 1.35-1.70 57-2 2.94-0.11 NOV 49 +2 3.98-1.65 51 +4 9.12 +4.49 DEC 32-7 1.57-3.47 42 +3 6.13 +1.09 Total 39.02-12.11 68.96 +17.83 26.13-15.33 1 DEP is departure from the long-term average. 2 2012 data is for the ten months through October. Table 3. Temperature and rainfall at Quicksand, Kentucky, in 2010, 2011, and 2012. 2010 2011 2012 2 Temp Rainfall Temp Rainfall Temp Rainfall F DEP 1 IN DEP F DEP IN DEP F DEP IN DEP JAN 31 0 4.09 +0.80 32 +1 2.63-0.66 40 +9 4.60 +1.31 FEB 32-1 2.82-0.77 42 +9 3.94 +0.34 42 +9 3.49-0.16 MAR 47 +6 2.38-1.96 48 +7 4.66 +0.32 57 +16 3.34-1.40 APR 60 +7 2.64-1.46 60 +7 11.65 +7.55 56 +3 2.02-2.08 MAY 67 +5 6.00 +1.52 65 +3 6.49 +2.01 69 +7 4.29-0.19 JUN 76 +6 4.26 +0.44 73 +3 3.73-0.09 71 +1 0.82-3.00 JUL 77 +3 3.06-2.19 78 +4 4.92-0.33 78 +4 5.20 +0.45 AUG 77 +4 3.77-0.24 75 +2 4.09 +0.08 74 +1 3.82-0.19 SEP 69 +3 0.63-2.89 67 +1 3.52 0 67 +1 10.05 +6.53 OCT 57 +3 1.33-1.58 55 +1 4.16 +1.25 55 +1 4.21 +1.30 NOV 47 +5 3.88 0 50 +8 5.15 +1.27 DEC 29-4 3.15-0.99 42 +9 4.25 +0.11 Total 38.02-9.32 59.19 +11.85 42.29 +2.97 1 DEP is departure from the long-term average. 2 2012 data is for the ten months through October. University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky 40546 RESEARCH
Seed quality. Buy premium-quality seed high in germination and purity and free from weed seed. Buy certified seed or proprietary seed of an improved variety. An improved variety is one that has performed well in independent trials. Other information on the label will include the test date (which must be within the past nine months), the level of germination, and the percentage of other crop and weed seed. Order seed well in advance of planting time to assure it will be available when needed. Description of the Tests Data from four studies are reported. Orchardgrass varieties were sown at Lexington (2009 and 2011), Princeton (2010), and Quicksand (2010). The soils at Lexington (Maury), Princeton (Crider), and Quicksand (Nolin) are well-drained silt loams and are well suited to orchardgrass production. Seedings were made at the rate of 20 pounds per acre into a prepared seedbed with a disk drill. Plots were 5 feet by 20 feet in a randomized complete block design with four replications with a harvest plot area of 5 feet by 15 feet. Nitrogen was top-dressed at 60 pounds per acre of actual nitrogen in March, after the first cutting, and again in late summer, for a total of 180 pounds per acre per season. The tests were harvested using a sickle-type forage plot harvester to simulate a spring cut hay/summer grazing/fall stockpile management system. Fresh weight samples were taken at each harvest to calculate percent dry matter production. Management practices for establishment, fertility, weed control, and harvest timing were in accordance with University of Kentucky recommendations. Results and Discussion Weather data for Lexington, Princeton and Quicksand are presented in tables 1, 2, and 3. Ratings for maturity (see Table 4 for maturity scale), stand persistence, and dry matter yields (tons per acre) are reported in tables 5 through 8. Yields are given by cutting date for 2012 and as total annual production. Stated yields are adjusted for percent weeds; therefore, tonnage given is for crop only. Varieties are listed by descending total yield. Experimental varieties, listed separately at the bottom of the tables, are not available commercially. Statistical analyses were performed on all data (including experimentals) to determine if the apparent differences are truly due to varietal differences or just to chance. In the tables, the varieties not significantly different from the top variety in that column are marked with one asterisk (*). To determine if two varieties are truly different, compare the difference between them to the Least Significant Difference (LSD) at the bottom of the column. If the difference is equal to or greater than the LSD, the varieties are truly different when grown under the conditions at the given locations. The Coefficient of Variation (CV), which is a measure of the variability of the data, is included for each column of means. Low variability is desirable, and increased variability within a study results in higher CVs and larger LSDs. Table 4. Descriptive scheme for the stages of development in perennial forage grasses. Code Description Remarks Leaf development 11 First leaf unfolded Applicable to regrowth of established (plants) and to primary growth of seedlings. 12 2 leaves unfolded Further subdivision by means of leaf development index (see text). 13 3 leaves unfolded 19 9 or more leaves unfolded Sheath elongation 20 No elongated sheath Denotes first phase of 21 1 elongated sheath new spring growth after 22 2 elongated sheaths overwintering.this character is used instead of tillering 23 3 elongated sheaths which is difficult to record in established stands. 29 9 or more elongated sheaths Tillering (alternative to sheath elongation) 21 Main shoot only Applicable to primary growth of seedlingsor to single tiller transplants. 22 Main shoot and 1 tiller 23 Main shoot and 2 tillers 24 Main shoot and 3 tillers 29 Main shoot and 9 or more tillers Stem elongation 31 First node palpable More precisely an 32 Second node palpable 33 Third node palpable 34 Fourth node palpable 35 Fifth node palpable 37 Flag leaf just visible 39 Flag leaf ligule/collar just visible Booting 45 Boot swollen Inflorescence emergence 50 Upper 1 to 2 cm of inflorescence visible 52 1/4 of inflorescence emerged 54 1/2 of inflorescence emerged 56 3/4 of inflorescence emerged 58 Base of inflorescence just visible Anthesis accumulation of nodes. Fertile and sterile tillers distinguishable. 60 Preanthesis Inflorescence-bearing internode is visible. No anthers are visible. 62 Beginning of anthesis First anthers appear. 64 Maximum anthesis Maximum pollen shedding. 66 End of anthesis No more pollen shedding. Seed ripening 75 Endosperm milky Inflorescence green 85 Endosperm soft doughy No seeds loosening when inflorescence is hit on palm. 87 Endosperm hard doughy Inflorescence losing chlorophyll; a few seeds loosening when inflorescence hit on palm 91 Endosperm hard Inflorescence-bearing internode losing chlorophyll; seeds loosening in quantitywhen inflorescence hit on palm. 93 Endosperm hard and dry Final stage of seed development; most seeds shed. Smith, J. Allan, and Virgil W. Hayes. 1981. p. 416-418. 14th International Grasslands Conference Proc. 1981. June 14-24, 1981, Lexington, Kentucky. 2
Table 9 summarizes information about distributors and yield performance across locations for all varieties currently included in tests discussed in this publication. Varieties are listed in alphabetical order, with the experimental varieties at the bottom. Remember that experimental varieties are not available for farm use; commercial varieties can be purchased through distributors. In Table 9, an open block indicates that the variety was not in that particular test (labeled at the top of the column); an x in the block means that the variety was in the test but yielded significantly less than the top-yielding variety. A single asterisk (*) means that the variety was not significantly different from the top-yielding variety in that study, based on the 0.05 LSD. It is best to choose a variety that has performed well over several years and locations. Remember to consider the distribution of yield across the growing season when evaluating productivity of orchardgrass varieties (tables 5 through 8). Table 10 is a summary of yield data from 1998 to 2012 of commercial varieties that have been entered in the Kentucky trials. The data is listed as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties entered in each specific trial. In other words, the mean for each trial is 100 percent varieties with percentages over 100 yielded better than average, and varieties with percentages less than 100 yielded lower than average. Direct, statistical comparisons of varieties cannot be made using the summary Table 10, but these comparisons do help to identify varieties for further consideration. Varieties that have performed better than average over many years and at several locations have stable performance; others may have performed well in wet years or on particular soil types. These details may influence variety choice, and the information can be found in the yearly reports. See the footnote in Table 10 to determine to which yearly report to refer. Summary Selecting a good orchardgrass variety is an important first step in establishing a productive stand of grass. Proper management, beginning with seedbed preparation and continuing throughout the life of the stand, is necessary for even the highest-yielding variety to produce to its genetic potential. The following is a list of University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension publications related to orchardgrass management. They are available from your county Extension office and are listed in the Publications section of the UK Forage Web site, www.uky. edu/ag/forage: y Lime and Fertilizer Recommendations (AGR-1) y Grain and Forage Crop Guide for Kentucky (AGR-18) y Renovating Hay and Pasture Fields (AGR-26) y Orchardgrass (AGR-58) y Establishing Forage Crops (AGR-64) y Forage Identification and Use Guide (AGR-175) y Rotational Grazing (ID-143) About the Authors Table 5. Dry matter yields, seedling vigor, maturity and stand persistence of orchardgrass varieties sown September 4, 2009, at Lexington, Kentucky. Maturity 2 Percent Stand Yield (tons/acre) 2012 3-year Total Seedling Vigor 1 Oct 13, 2009 May 6 May 5 May 7 Oct 13 Apr 13 Oct 18 Mar 20 Oct 27 Mar 21 Oct 24 May 8 Jun 21 Oct 23 Total Prairie 4.0 56.0 55.5 55.0 100 100 98 97 99 99 97 3.19 4.25 0.93 0.56 0.68 2.17 9.61* Persist 3.5 57.5 53.8 55.0 99 100 99 98 98 98 97 3.00 4.26 1.03 0.45 0.69 2.17 9.43* Benchmark Plus 3.8 57.0 54.5 56.5 100 100 98 75 99 99 98 3.04 3.94 1.05 0.52 0.68 2.24 9.22* Potomac 3.9 57.5 52.3 54.5 99 100 77 98 97 97 97 3.12 3.83 0.92 0.49 0.68 2.09 9.04* Prodigy 1.6 57.0 55.0 55.5 88 95 95 96 96 97 98 2.75 4.11 0.94 0.47 0.65 2.06 8.92* Crown 2.6 56.0 54.5 54.5 98 99 97 97 99 100 98 2.78 3.79 0.81 0.49 0.70 2.00 8.57 Profit 3.0 53.0 51.8 52.5 95 98 97 98 98 98 98 2.61 3.71 0.93 0.53 0.66 2.13 8.45 Tekapo 2.1 51.0 51.3 53.5 89 90 97 97 98 98 97 2.09 3.12 0.96 0.39 0.66 2.01 7.22 IS-OG 51 3.8 56.5 49.5 55.0 98 100 99 97 97 99 98 2.69 4.00 0.91 0.52 0.70 2.13 8.82* B-9-NIC4 2.8 57.0 51.3 56.5 95 98 96 96 97 98 98 2.57 3.93 0.88 0.55 0.68 2.11 8.61 2011 Total 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012 2010 Total Mean 3.1 55.9 52.9 50.9 96 98 95 95 98 98 98 2.78 3.89 0.94 0.50 0.68 2.11 8.79 CV,% 30.7 2.2 8.2 3.1 6 3 15 15 2 2 2 8.98 10.26 13.97 19.56 11.30 10.21 6.99 LSD,0.05 1.4 1.8 6.3 2.5 9 5 20 21 3 3 3 0.36 0.58 0.19 0.14 0.11 0.31 0.89 1 Vigor score based on scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the most vigorous seedling growth. 2 Maturity rating scale: 37=flag leaf emergence, 45=boot swollen, 50=beginning of inflorescence emergence, 58=complete emergence of inflorescence, 62=beginning of pollen shed. See Table 4 for complete scale. *Not significantly different from the highest numerical value in the column, based on the 0.05 LSD. G.L. Olson is a research specialist and S.R. Smith and G.D. Lacefield are Extension professors in Forages. T.D. Phillips is an associated professor in Tall Fescue Breeding, and D.C. Ditsch is an Extension professor in Feed Production. 3
Table 6. Dry matter yields, seedling vigor, maturity and stand persistence of orchardgrass varieties sown September 16, 2010, at Princeton, Kentucky. Seedling Vigor 1 Maturity 2 Percent Stand Yield (tons/acre) Nov 19, 2012 2010 2011 2012 2011 2012 2-year 2010 Apr 18 Nov 19 Apr 8 Oct 24 Mar 21 Oct 29 Total Apr 18 Jun 19 Oct 29 Total Total Persist 2.0 29.5 94 94 99 99 97 2.81 1.16 0.40 0.50 2.06 4.87* Profit 3.6 29.5 99 100 100 100 94 2.91 1.10 0.43 0.40 1.94 4.84* Extend 4.8 29.0 100 100 100 100 98 2.87 0.98 0.42 0.51 1.91 4.78* Potomac 3.6 30.0 99 100 100 100 99 2.90 0.99 0.37 0.47 1.84 4.74* RAD-LCF25 3.6 29.0 99 98 99 99 96 2.83 0.98 0.41 0.46 1.85 4.69* Benchmark Plus 3.9 29.5 99 99 99 99 97 2.78 1.02 0.34 0.48 1.84 4.63* Tucker 3.9 29.0 99 100 100 99 95 2.91 0.95 0.37 0.38 1.70 4.61* Prairie 3.6 29.5 99 99 100 100 96 2.60 1.01 0.34 0.46 1.82 4.41* Tekapo 4.0 30.3 99 98 100 99 98 2.62 0.84 0.39 0.48 1.71 4.33 OG 0404 4.6 30.0 99 100 100 100 99 2.93 1.07 0.39 0.50 1.96 4.88* Dg83R01 3.3 29.0 98 95 98 99 92 2.66 1.05 0.39 0.50 1.94 4.60* IS-OG53 1.0 29.5 5 8 79 87 83 2.59 1.10 0.42 0.46 1.98 4.57* B-9.1476 2.6 29.5 97 91 95 96 81 2.48 1.02 0.49 0.33 1.84 4.32 Dg12R01 4.8 29.5 100 100 100 100 97 2.57 0.90 0.40 0.36 1.66 4.23 Mean 3.6 29.5 92 91 98 98 94 2.75 1.01 0.40 0.45 1.86 4.61 CV,% 23.5 2.9 3 3 3 2 3 9.82 10.44 15.69 15.55 9.89 7.74 LSD,0.05 1.3 1.2 4 3 4 3 5 0.39 0.21 0.09 0.10 0.26 0.51 1 Vigor score based on scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the most vigorous seedling growth. 2 Maturity rating scale: 37=flag leaf emergence, 45=boot swollen, 50=beginning of inflorescence emergence, 58=complete emergence of inflorescence, 62=beginning of pollen shed.see Table 4 for complete scale. *Not significantly different from the highest numerical value in the column, based on the 0.05 LSD. Table 7. Dry matter yields, seedling vigor, maturity and stand persistence of orchardgrass varieties sown September 24, 2010, at Quicksand, Kentucky. Seedling Vigor 1 Maturity 2 Percent Stand Yield (tons/acre) Nov 11, 2011 2010 2011 2012 2011 2012 2-year 2010 May11 Nov 11 Mar 29 Nov 8 Mar 20 Nov 1 Total Apr 19 May 24 Oct 23 Total Total Profit 3.5 50.3 100 100 100 100 98 4.91 0.73 1.02 0.50 2.25 7.16* Prairie 3.3 57.5 98 100 99 99 94 4.87 0.67 0.94 0.62 2.23 7.10* Extend 3.8 51.5 100 100 100 99 85 4.46 0.60 1.15 0.35 2.10 6.56* RAD-LCF25 2.6 40.3 99 98 96 95 83 4.17 0.74 1.12 0.41 2.26 6.43 Persist 1.3 59.5 91 93 96 96 95 3.67 0.75 0.87 0.50 2.12 5.79 Potomac 4.3 49.8 100 100 100 100 85 3.73 0.62 0.79 0.53 1.95 5.68 Benchmark Plus 2.5 59.5 99 100 100 100 98 3.67 0.55 0.85 0.42 1.83 5.50 Tucker 2.4 39.0 99 99 98 98 89 3.56 0.46 0.87 0.32 1.65 5.21 Tekapo 2.6 51.0 98 98 96 97 94 3.24 0.41 0.82 0.43 1.66 4.89 OG 0404 4.5 57.5 100 100 100 100 96 4.88 0.85 1.00 0.61 2.46 7.34* IS-OG51 3.0 52.8 100 100 100 100 89 3.88 0.77 1.11 0.47 2.35 6.23 Dg83R01 2.3 37.0 100 98 86 92 76 4.20 0.46 1.08 0.27 1.81 6.00 Dg12R01 4.4 39.0 99 100 100 99 96 3.53 0.65 1.01 0.47 2.13 5.67 B-9-NIC4 2.5 55.5 100 100 100 98 94 3.70 0.58 0.75 0.41 1.74 5.44 B-9.1476 2.0 37.0 96 97 86 90 64 3.71 0.48 0.95 0.28 1.72 5.42 IS-OG53 0.5 37.0 43 28 58 75 61 3.24 0.38 1.31 0.35 2.04 5.27 Mean 2.8 48.4 95 94 95 96 87 3.96 0.61 0.98 0.43 2.02 5.98 CV,% 22.4 8.3 4 3 10 5 15 13.11 41.83 10.51 31.97 14.30 10.59 LSD,0.05 0.9 5.7 5 4 13 7 18 0.74 0.36 0.15 0.20 0.41 0.90 1 Vigor score based on scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the most vigorous seedling growth. 2 Maturity rating scale: 37=flag leaf emergence, 45=boot swollen, 50=beginning of inflorescence emergence,58=complete emergence of inflorescence, 62=beginning of pollen shed.see Table 4 for complete scale. *Not significantly different from the highest numerical value in the column, based on the 0.05 LSD. 4
Table 8. Dry matter yields, seedling vigor and stand persistence of orchardgrass varieties sown September 14, 2011, at Lexington, Kentucky. Seedling Vigor 1 Percent Stand Yield (tons/acre) Oct 11, 2011 2012 2012 2011 Oct 11 Mar 21 Oct 24 May 7 Jun 18 Oct 22 Total Extend 5.0 100 100 100 1.17 0.83 0.94 2.94* Profit 4.9 100 100 100 1.20 0.76 0.94 2.91* Persist 4.8 100 100 100 1.11 0.77 0.95 2.83* Haymaster 5.0 100 100 100 0.97 0.78 0.95 2.70 Tucker 4.8 100 100 100 1.03 0.80 0.85 2.68 Prairie 5.0 100 100 100 0.97 0.77 0.92 2.67 Potomac 5.0 100 100 100 1.14 0.71 0.80 2.65 Benchmark 4.6 100 100 100 1.05 0.72 0.88 2.65 Plus Tekapo 4.5 100 100 100 0.96 0.53 0.74 2.23 PPG-OG 102 5.0 100 100 100 1.29 0.82 1.00 3.11* PPG-OG 103 4.8 100 100 100 1.14 0.89 0.98 3.00* XLF OG 4.4 100 100 100 1.05 0.82 0.90 2.77* PPG-OG 101 5.0 100 100 100 1.13 0.71 0.90 2.74* Mean 4.8 100 100 100 1.09 0.76 0.90 2.76 CV,% 7.0 0 0 0 10.02 9.48 11.02 9.92 LSD,0.05 0.5 0 0 0 0.30 0.10 0.14 0.39 1 Vigor score based on scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the most vigorous seedling growth *Not significantly different from the highest numerical value in the column, based on the 0.05 LSD. Table 9. Performance of orchardgrass varieties across years and locations. Princeton Lexington Quicksand 2010 1 2009 2011 2010 Proprietor/KY Distibutor 11 2 12 10 11 12 12 11 12 Benchmark Plus FFR/Southern States * * * * * x 3 x x Crown Donley Seed x * * Extend Farm Service Genetics/Allied * * * * * Haymaster Ampac Seed Company x Persist Smith Seed Services * * * * * * x * Potomac Public * * * * * x x x Prairie Turner Seed Company * * * * * x * * Prodigy Caudill Seed x * * Profit Ampac Seed Company * * x * * * * * RAD-LXCF25 Radix Research * * * * Tekapo Ampac Seed Company * x x x * x x x Tucker Oregro Seeds, Inc. * x x x x B-9.1476 Blue Moon Farms x * x x B-9-NIC4 Blue Moon Farms x * * x x Dg12R01 Barenbrug * * x * DG83R01 Barenbrug * * * x IS-OG51 DLF International Seeds x * * x * IS-OG53 DLF International Seeds * * x x OG 0404 FFR/Southern States * * * * PPG OG 101 Mountain View Seeds * PPG-OG 102 Mountain View Seeds * PPG-OG 103 Mountain View Seeds * XLF OG ProSeeds Marketing * 1 Establishment year. 2 Harvest year. 3 x in the box indicates the variety was in the test but yielded significantly less than the top ranked variety in the test.open box indicates the variety was not in the test. *Not significantly different from the highest yielding variety in the test. 5
Table 10. Summary of Kentucky orchardgrass yield trials, 1999-2012 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial). Lexington Princeton Quicksand 1999 1,2 2001 2003 2006 2007 2009 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 1999 2001 2003 2005 2010 2-yr 4 2-yr 3-yr 4-yr 3-yr 3-yr 2-yr 2-yr 3-yr 3-yr 3-yr 3-yr 2-yr 2-yr 2-yr 3-yr 4-yr 2-yr Proprietor Abertop Pennington 71 Albert Univ. of Wis. 103 106 105(2) Amba DLF InternationalSeeds 96 80 88(2) Ambassador DLF InternationalSeeds 95 Ambrosia American Grass Seed Prod. 90 Athos DLF InternationalSeeds 98 105 102(2) Benchmark FFR/Sou. St. 103 101 97 113 106 104(5) Benchmark Plus FFR/Sou. St. 100 108 105 107 107 104 99 107 102 91 103(10) Boone Public 103 104 104(2) Bronc Grassland West 98 Bounty Allied Seed 101 98 100(2) Century Seed Research of Oregon 98 104 101(2) Checkmate Seed Research of Oregon 102 Christoss Proseeds Marketing 92 Command Seed Research of Oregon 87 Crown Donley Seed 101 97 105 101 105 97 101(6) Crown Royale Donley Seed 110 Crown Royale Plus Donley Seed 108 97 103(2) Eastwood Ampac Seed 86 86 86(2) Elsie Rose-AgriSeed 98 Endurance DLF InternationalSeeds 104 Extend Allied Seed 100 103 109 Hallmark James VanLeeuwen 102 102 103 98 101 96 100(6) Harvestar Columbia Seeds 91 97 106 100 99(4) Haymaster FFR/Sou. St. 94 97 96(2) Haymate FFR/Sou. St. 106 93 100 106 108 104 103 103(7) Icon Seed Research of Oregon 105 98 102(2) Intensiv Barenbrug 102 Lazuly Proseeds Marketing 97 LG-31 DLF InternationalSeeds 92 Mammoth DLF InternationalSeeds 102 104 103(2) Megabite Turf-Seed 94 105 106 101 102(4) Niva DLF InternationalSeeds 81 Paiute DLF InternationalSeeds 108 Persist Smith Seed 123 105 106 107 101 105 108 101 96 106(9) Potomac Public 104 103 98 108 102 99 94 100(7) Prairie Turner Seed 101 107 101 109 95 104 100 104 95 102 105 107 118 104(13) Prodigy Caudill Seed 101 103 102(2) Profit Ampac Seed 107 96 103 104 119 106(5) RAD-LCF 25 Radix Research 101 107 104(2) Renegade Grassland West 95 Shawnee Rose-AgriSeed 86 Shiloh Proseeds Marketing 109 Shiloh II Proseeds Marketing 117 Spanish Pink DLF InternationalSeeds 82 Spanish Red DLF InternationalSeeds 101 94 98(2) Takena Smith Seed 107 100 108 105(3) Tekena II Smith Seed 110 102 109 106 104 106(5) Tekapo Ampac Seed 88 91 81 82 98 86 93 94 92 105 91 81 90(12) Tucker Oregro Seeds 96 102 99 86 96(4) Udder Improved Forages 100 107 102 102 106 99 103(6) Vailliant Proseeds Marketing 96 Vision Cropmark Seeds 63 67 65(2) 1 Year trial was established. 2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in forage yield between varieties.to find actual yields, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 1999 was harvested two years, so the final report would be 2001 Orchardgrass Report archived in the KY Forage Web site at <www.uky.edu/ag/forage>. 3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials. 4 Number of years of data. Mean 3 (#trials) 6
7
Mention or display of a trademark, proprietary product, or firm in text or figures does not constitute an endorsement and does not imply approval to the exclusion of other suitable products or firms. The College of Agriculture is an Equal Opportunity Organization. 12-2012